Experimental Philosophy

What is the folk concept of FAKE NEWS? M. Kürthy & I ran some studies (N=1200), showing falsity and source deception (posturing as a reliable newspaper) increase fake-news classifications. Conservatism also plays a role. Preprint: bit.ly/4sLTe1J

@victorckumar In experimental philosophy, there are adversarial collaborations in the strict sense - where different philosophers have defended opposing views on a question and then co-author a paper to resolve the debate Here is one example: philarchive.org/rec/PRIWDE-2

It’s not possible for the data to decide which side is right (sorry x-philes), but could adversarial collaboration in philosophy achieve analogous epistemic values?

For real though, have any philosophers actually tried to develop a close analogue to adversarial collaboration? Like where dissenting interlocutors are co-authors or otherwise more directly involved in a project?

There are three new calls on the X-Phi Blog: »6th European Experimental Philosophy Conference«, »Interdisciplinary Perspectives on Linguistic Justice«, and »The Armchair on Trial«. Read more on xphi.net! #philosophy #xphi #experimentalphilosophy

New post 🚨 Is philosophy too precious for AI? On the science-humanities divide in LLM appreciation [link below]

@Afinetheorem @ben_golub Independent of which side is right, it’s good to see this issue being debated and to hear the arguments on each side

@Afinetheorem @ben_golub It’s really good to see this debate. In my own field, it is as widely seen as rude or otherwise uncouth to argue for Ben’s position, so people who take Kevin’s position don’t feel compelled to consider objections - they can just tell the other side to shut up

PhD students interested in the history of thought: you must apply to Duke's HOPE summer program. I went twice as a grad student! You can't be a scholar without knowing the history and historiography of your field, and this is the best place to get the basics.

"children as young as age 4 viewed morally bad people as less happy than morally good people" (I wonder is this depends on the moral character of the viewer – ie most people are good and would feel bad doing bad. But baddies might feel different.) psycnet.apa.org/doi/10.1037/xg…

By contrast, what gets studied in most work on creativity is just: ideas that are peculiar or different from anything people have done before Newman argues that studying real creativity (ability to come up with good ideas) requires a fundamentally different research program

Think about what you are doing when you write a song, or run a scientific experiment, or invent a game to play with your kids Your goal is come up with ideas that are actually *good*

Psychologist George Newman has a new book out about creativity, but it’s about something very different from what people usually mean by “being creative” Usual topic: ideas that are zany or original Newman’s topic: ideas that actually work amazon.com/How-Great-Idea…

Perjury is often explained (including to juries) as the legal name for the folk concept of lying, but it is narrower. Lying has a dual character, research by @izaskoczen suggests, and perjury corresponds only with the concrete aspect: buff.ly/ULuVKId HT @xphilosopher

Key idea: The legal concept is not some completely distinct thing that you would have to learn separately Instead, ordinary concept comes with two different criteria. To learn the legal concept, you have to know which of those criteria to use in legal contexts

New experimental jurisprudence paper on the legal concept PERJURY vs. the ordinary concept LYING This paper introduces a surprising new view about the relationship between legal concepts and ordinary concepts

New paper in Law and Philosophy, open access: link.springer.com/article/10.100… special thank you to @xphilosopher for super helpful comments on drafts! A 🧵 1/6

Does going to college make people more liberal? Probably yes, but it’s complicated… For decades, US adults with degrees have held more left-leaning views on social issues, but not economic ones. And, until the 2010s, grads did not *identify* as more liberal than non-grads.

@M_Prinzing What you do in this paper is *exactly* the thing that's so catastrophically missing from the larger public discourse You argue that philosophy classes make people better thinkers (the whole point) and not just that it's good to make people better thinkers (totally not the point)

@xphilosopher I love it when you get spicy! I don't know about history, comp lit, etc. But haven't you heard that studying philosophy makes people better thinkers? 😜 doi.org/10.1017/apa.20…

As a humanities prof, I feel ashamed whenever I read contemporary “defenses of the humanities” These “defenses” show a failure of basic critical thinking. There is never any engagement with the arguments that have been given on the opposite side [Thread]

@Dijo_Austerlitz That is such a good example! At that time, the people who were supposed to have the deepest understanding were so fundamentally wrong When people question us, their core question is whether we are still getting everything wrong today

@xphilosopher And convincingly explains the best answer I know to Steiner's old question: How did a higly cultured country with highly cultured elites as Germany end up crowning Hitler and supporting his genocide?

All of this is catastrophically missing the point! Clearly, it is good to give students a deeper understanding of art. What our critics keep saying is: humanities courses are not doing that

They always say something like: “A university education isn’t just about finding a way to make lots of money after you graduate. It is so important for us, as human beings, to have a deeper understanding of art, literature, history…“